Dr. Cheney Goes His Own Way – Again

September 3, 2009

Posted by Cort Johnson

In April Dr. Cheney startled ME/CFS patients he announced that based on echocardiographic testing,that several commonly used supplements, some of which he had previously championed , were actually bad for ME/CFS patients. They included glutathione/whey protein, coenzyme Q. 10, D-Ribose and Vit D. Now he’s casting doubt on another core treatment; omega-3 fatty acids (fish oils).

Dr. Cheney is using somethinghecalls ECHO Terrain mapping to assess the effectiveness of chronic fatigue syndrome treatments. This appears to involve placing a substance on the patients skin and then measuring their IVRT (speed with which the heart expands during diastole).Substances which increase IVRT are believed to have negative effects.

Inhis latest newsletter he reported that

In this post, we explore the incredible finding that different ratios of omega-3 to omega-6 EFA’s appear to produce dramatically different effects on the echocardiographically derived ETM, both positive and negative.Surprisingly, the use of omega-3 EFA’s and especially fish oil is uniformly negative (N=10) in CFS but not in controls (N=3).This is not terribly surprising since omega-3 oils are far more easily oxidized and is possibly explained by the more redox impaired status of CFS. However, we are also findingthat omega-6 alone, while better than omega-3alone in an oxidizing state such as CFS, is not nearly as positive as a mixture of the omega-3, omega-6 and omega-9 EFA’s.

In particular, a ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 of3:1appears ideal and generates the most positive ETM response.Such a ratio is found inhigh grade olive oilbut not lower grades of olive oil which are as high as 13:1, omega-6 over omega-3.The use of fish oil as an omega-3 source is inferior to the use of a plant source of omega-3 such as flaxseed oil or possibly a cyanobacteria derived source such as spirulina.As the ratios of six to three approach 1:1, the ETM response becomes more variable in each patient but the 3:1 ratio of omega-six over omega-three is always a good choice if it excludes fish oil.

This important finding of large EFA ratio variances in ETM response could be used to great advantage as the regulation of the eicosanoids are very dependent on a proper EFA ratio and this appears especially so for CFS. This means that the entire paracrine and autocrine hormone system involved in eiconasoid regulation can be favorably influenced with the right EFA ratio and this could have profound and positive effects in CFS. Conversely, the wrong EFA ratios could have significant and negative consequences in CFS.

Recieved Wisdom: That is opposite to most of the received wisdom in the field which states that omega three fatty acids are good and omega six fatty acids are, for the most part, bad. The typical Western diet contains high levels of omega six fatty acids and lower levels of omega-3 fatty acids. Findings that omega six fatty acidsappeared to quickly break down to form metabolites which turned on the inflammatory process made omega-3 fatty acid supplementation a hot item for many suffering from autoimmune disorders such as arthritis, lupus and asthma.

Dig Deeper:More on Omega Fatty Acids in ME/CFS A correlation between low omega 3 levels and a marker (CD 69) indicating a defect is present in the early T-cell response suggested that low omega 3 levels could play a role in the immune dysfunction seen in CFS. Reduced omega 3 levels were also associated with increased fatigue, pain and memory problems in Dr. Maes study. Increased omega 6 levels were associated with irritability, memory problems and muscular tension. (Studies in the general population suggest that increased omega three blood levels are associated with reduced rates of dementia, depression and death. )

Treatment Studies - Two studies of the efficacy of LRT therapy in CFS have had mixed results.The failed LRT study used Efamol, an LRT high in omega 6 fatty acids. The successful trial (Puri’s) used a formulation (‘Eye Q’) which has reduced omega 6 fatty acid levels.Dr. Maes suggests that CFS patients use only LRT formulations that have low or no omega 6 fatty acid levels in them.

All Wet or Leading the Way? One might begin to think, given the weight of professional opinion both inside and outside the ME/CFS community that Dr. Cheney’s electrocardiographic findings might not be as efficacious as he might think. But hold on, Dr. Cheney might not be as lone a wolf as we think; it turns out that Dr. Patricia Kane believes an almost similar ratio (4:1) of omega 6/omega-3 ratio’s is optimal as well.

“while omega 6 fatty acids have been made out to be “bad fats,” they are in fact essential to the integrity of our cell membranes and thus to our overall health. They have gotten a bad rap, a misconception that needs to be corrected.” http://www.longevity-and-antiaging-s…d-testing.html

She argues that both fatty acids have their place in the body and that taking too many omega 3 fatty can suppress omega 6’s positive effects. (The opposite does not appear to occur; omega 6’s do not appear to inhibit omega 3’s). Her testing reveals that patients taking fish oils tend to have very high omega-3 very low omega six levels. She also questions whether turning down the inflammatory response – if one is present – is always necessarily a good thing. She advises that patients eat a low carbohydrate diet rich in things such as egg yolks and a combination of cold pressed sunflower and safflower oils.

I like Cheney as much as the next person and have followed his work closely. He has his own ideas and they change. Why shouldn’t they? He has alot of patients to deal with and the picture is confusing. As a Patient Advocate, I have one patient to deal with. I too have my own ideas and they also change. This is a confusing disease. I know one thing though. The proportion of omega 3 to omega 6 means zilch in the ultimate outcome of this disease. Same for the co-Q, yes or no, glutathione, yes or no. There are large elements at work here and these minor adjustments are not going to solve this problem. All this is an unnecessary confusion in an already confusing field. I am certain that his machine is beneficial in determining the usefulness of some items, but his repeated citing of IVRT as the answer for everything is a bit thick. I continued to read his articles and reports with interest. I would really like to know more about the usefulness of artesunate and cell signaling factors and where we can get the latter.

Yeah, what happened in the 1980′s? Did we all get our omega 3s and omega 6s messed up? If so why did my parents live to be 80 and 95 in pretty good health, and I have been sick 14 years following some flu-like illness? Or was it that tick bite?

The advice that omega 3′s are good and omega 6′s are bad came from the observation that people were getting too many 6′s and not enough 3′s. And they were getting bad forms of the 6′s such as vegetable and corn oils which are processed junk. So omega 6′s aren’t bad. Most agree that we naturally need more 6′s in a ratio of 2:1 to 4:1 (6′s to 3′s) but most get 10-20:1. So Dr. Cheney’s ratio of 3:1 fits in there. And it’s true that fish oil has a problem with oxidation. The advice is to take Vit E with fish oil to prevent oxidation. Some take Krill oil because it contains astaxanthin, an antioxidant.

But whey/glutathione, CoQ-10 and D being bad for us? Those are the 3 that helped me the most, besides supplements for my endocrine system! That puzzles me.

All sections of the Phoenix Rising website are compiled by a layman. They are not a substitute for a physician and are for informational uses only. Please discuss any treatments in these pages with your physician.